sanderjd

43 ms·

931.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Yeah, "no one wants to outright explain what happened" is called "chilling effects" and is one of the explicit goals of an authoritarian regime like the one we have in the US now. Nobody wants to get fired and get death
932.
by sanderjd 2y ago
In your earlier comment you said: > 3. Created a moral hazard by selling it's own policies to homeowners who were dropped by the private market. My friend, that's the subsidy. Those are public policies with subsidized premi
933.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Actually no, this is 4d chess bullshit. It's actually just bad for business.
934.
by sanderjd 2y ago
We'll see! That might be the goal. I'm pretty skeptical that is going to work. And a big part of the reason why is that there are a lot of wealthy businesspeople in the US, and that would be bad for most of them.
935.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Nope! I would not.
936.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Not all of them have gained power in exchange for the wealth.
937.
by sanderjd 2y ago
If the comment had said "the five most powerful people", I wouldn't have quibbled with it. But the overlap between the richest and the most powerful is not perfect, and the rich people outside that overlap are gonna be piss
938.
by sanderjd 2y ago
They don't benefit though! This is bad for them too! Elon Musk is way poorer today than he was on inauguration day. What's going on right now is, truly, only good for nations that benefit from a week United States. But that realiz
939.
by sanderjd 2y ago
No.
940.
by sanderjd 2y ago
The honest answer is that other autocratic regimes, who were enemies of the US until a couple months ago, greatly benefit from this. But it is bad for business, and once the entire business community in the US figures that out, I honestly
941.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Counterpoint: No thank you!
942.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Yes, but it's an important accounting gimmick.
943.
by sanderjd 2y ago
No, my point is that everyone feels the water being too hot already because it has happened quickly, not that nobody has noticed it heating up because it has happened too slowly. It's more like draining the water in the pot and pouring
944.
by sanderjd 2y ago
It isn't higher than ever, because it's been dropping for a few weeks, as the initial benefit of the doubt honeymoon period has already begun to fade.
945.
by sanderjd 2y ago
The question wasn't "should you be thankful?", the question was "has fire insurance been heavily subsidized by the state?". The answer to that question, which is implicit in multiple of the bullet points in your com
946.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I honestly don't feel like anyone feels like the water is heating up slowly. Just sitting here in a coffee shop for an hour, I've overheard about five different conversations about everything the current administration is screwing
947.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Being able to borrow at low rates is only one outcome of being a very reliable government (to this point). People struggling financially and being unable to buy property are policy choices that have nothing to do with reliability. To illust
948.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Right, if you hadn't said it yourself, I would have said that this is just another form of "you're holding it wrong ". But my point is that if this is actually the target market for these products - people who are gonna
949.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I'm a little confused... You're citing the existence of the government subsidy as a way to question its existence?
950.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I'm having trouble making sense of anything in this comment.
951.
by sanderjd 2y ago
The US government has not been unreliable. It has been very much the opposite of that, for a very very long time. That's why it has the best credit that any entity has ever had. Sometimes I feel like a lot of you want to break things j
952.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I don't know, but I also think it's reasonable for people (who aren't me) to see if they can figure out use cases where they do want that, and actually make them work. I'm not particularly bullish on any of these project
953.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I don't think this tracks at all.
954.
by sanderjd 2y ago
It really is an interesting question. But my prediction is that AI will be "de-hyped" by then in the same way that the internet was "de-hyped" in the mid-2000s, by being pervasive but mature.
955.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Still short sighted though. I feel like they are speed running "how to create backlash".
956.
by sanderjd 2y ago
Yes. It's entirely a value judgement about which assets are useful for the government to hold and which aren't. Count me on the land useful and crypto not useful side. (Although I don't have a huge issue with them holding ont
957.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I mean, there have been a number of examples of people losing access to cryptocurrency trading during times of chaos. The rebuttal is "sure, but not the ones that are actually decentralized!". Ok, but the cryptocurrency industry d
958.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I think what we've been seeing with generative AI is much more of an argument against blockchains being a revolutionary technology than for it. This is what it looks like for a technology to go mainstream, relentless adoption that
959.
by sanderjd 2y ago
I think the interesting interplay with this is in "need" vs. "want". I share the conventional wisdom that nothing, or very nearly nothing, needs these properties. But I don't think it's unreasonable that peop
960.
by sanderjd 2y ago
It still can, at least so far. But courts are slow.

More ›